Skip to content

Is this the S Times exclusive?

Russell Brand has denied unspecified “very, very serious criminal allegations” he said had been put to him by a television company and newspaper.

The former actor and broadcaster, 48, posted a video to his YouTube channel on Friday night addressing claims he said had been made about him in private letters by journalists.

Mr Brand said he had received “two extremely disturbing letters” detailing “a litany of extremely egregious and aggressive attacks” from a “mainstream media TV company and a newspaper”.

Apparently the S Times is running a big, big, all hands on deck, story this weekend.

Is this it?

Probably not. Brand would have to be the father of Katherine’s little princes for him to make a big big story these days…

11 thoughts on “Is this the S Times exclusive?”

  1. “Brand would have to be the father of Katherine’s little princes for him to make a big big story these days…”

    He may be out the mainstream but that hardly matters. His YouTube channel has over 6.5m subscribers and the YouTube video referred to in the story has 173k viewers after 9 hours online.

    For those wanting a laugh, spud’s YouTube channel- which he seems to have given uo on – managed 5k subscribers and most of his videos were watched by a few hundred people.

  2. Running a successful YouTube channel requires dedication, hard work and an engaging personality that can an audience can relate to.

    It’s completely baffling why Spud didn’t get any viewers.

  3. Mr Brand has moved a long way off the reservation in recent years.

    His platforming of individuals with interesting views about Dr Fauci and the NIH plus his interviews with RFK Jr and more recently Tucker Carlson meant that efforts to discredit him personally were inevitable.

  4. Hmm, how serious can these “very, very serious criminal allegations” be? I mean, if a media outlet got evidence that a celebrity had been robbing banks, funding terrorism or diddling kiddies, they couldn’t just keep hold of it as material for a show or a story. Even accusations that some past sex wasn’t consensual won’t mean much if they’re only made via the media. One presumes, if this is the first Brand has heard about it, that the police haven’t been involved.

  5. There’s also the possibility that with the apparent increase in Wokists and institutional capture there are fewer and fewer targets for the main stream media to vilify and make money from. Can’t do him because he’s one of us. Can’t do her because she is from the oppressed, can’t do them for their pronoun ability.

    They used to say that it was the tallest poppies that got cut, now with many people kneeling down the ones still standing stand out.

  6. Alleged rape and sexual abuse.

    It’s all she said / he said. The “case” that can hurt him is the 16 year old, just based on modern sexual mores.
    Even saying “hey, that relationship was consensual” makes him look dodgy.

    Just to be clear, I’ve never liked Brand and feel his heterodox schtik is disingenuous. However, this coordinated attack actually plays to his act.

  7. Bloke in the Fourth Reich

    It’s a strange strange world where simultaneously consensual sex with legal age persons is not acceptable but drag queen story hour is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *